Don't get me wrong buddy but I have issues with those points you've made..Why should Iran go back to joining EU financial institutions again after all they've done to Iran? What's the guarantee that they won't do it again if there's a fallout in relationship in future?
You are missing the point, Iran has already admitted in some ways that it is willing to stop enriching 20%, because to Iran that is an area where it can compromise.http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012-04-09/iran-nuclear-talks/54121378/1?csp=34news
Until a SWIFT alternative actually is developed, Iran needs to be brought back into the system. It cannot go on trading rice for oil and other barter goods.
You are also missing the fact that both sides want to reduce tensions and develop an acceptable agreement. Don't listen to the news articles about "demands' and posturing that is just negotiation tactics.
In reality, Iran wants to be able to keep enriching to 3.5% and is willing to concede 20% enrichment for the time being as a concession. The US wants to achieve a diplomatic breakthrough and wants Iran to stop 20% enrichment, but it hasn't asked Iran to stop 3.5% enrichment. That right there is a huge shift from negotiations of the past.
In the end, I think the negotiations will have Iran stop 20% enrichment, it may or may not ship its 20% stockpile for fuel plates for research reactor, and allow more intrusive UN inspections of Fordow.
In return, Iran keeps enriching at 3.5% and expands its nuclear program, Fordow facility is allowed to continue operating under more intrusive UN inspections, it delays the EU oil embargo, returns back to SWIFT, and the easing of sanctions. The US probably will not remove the oil sanctions, however, they might grant more exemptions to countries that buy oil from Iran as a way of "easing" the sanctions.
This way both countries get to achieve some of their goals and reduce tensions and talks of war.